[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[atlarge-discuss] Re: icannatlarge.com
On 2002-09-20 07:08:50 -0400, Joanna Lane wrote:
As Chair, I am unwilling to proceed into something that may bring
legal recourse against myself or my successor in title. This is a
serious legal issue with ramifications that require me to take
immediate action to protect myself personally from any liability
issues as well as my family.
Calm down. Neither icannwatch.org, nor Bret Fausett's ICANN.Blog
have been sued so far.
If you are really afraid, then I'd suggest that you (1) get legal
advice (as opposed to just an opinion expressed on a mailing list),
and (2) ask Stuart if ICANN would have any problems with the use of
their name. However, there may be some good arguments for just
going on and ignoring this entire trademark business.
If you decide to ask ICANN and they do not permit the use of the
name, you can at least use that in order to generate some publicity.
If course, all these considerations only make sense once you have a
result from the vote. Maybe one of the other options wins - in that
case, you don't even have to create a headache out of this.
In addition and after very careful consideration, the Watchdogs
concur unanimously that the ICANNATLarge option must be
invalidated from the ballot, but the vote to choose the
organization name can continue with the other four options on the
ballot.
DON'T DO THAT.
Let the vote continue in its present form. If the result is
something like "ICANNAtLarge.something", you can deal with the
problem AFTER the vote (see above). In the worst case, you generate
some good press for this effort (and some bad press for ICANN), and
actually use the top name which doesn't contain "ICANN".
--
Thomas Roessler http://log.does-not-exist.INFO/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de